Old Versions of ESRI Geodatabases

November 21st, 2006 · 19 Comments · ArcGIS Desktop, ArcSDE, ESRI, GIS

(was “ESRI 9.2 Personal Geodatabases in ArcGIS 9.1″)

As with most updates to ArcGIS, 9.2 personal geodatabases do not work with previous versions of ArcGIS. The only work around is to use a blank geodatabase from that version of ArcGIS. For those who have already upgraded and need a 9.1 geodatabase, 9.0 geodatabase or a 8.3 geodatabase, feel free to grab one from below. You can’t go wrong with the ArcGIS 8.3 version so unless you need annotation, it might be best to use it.

ArcGIS 9.2 Version Geodatabase

ArcGIS 9.1 Version Geodatabase

ArcGIS 9.0 Version Geodatabase

ArcGIS 8.3 Version Geodatabase

Tags:

19 responses so far ↓

1 J // Nov 21, 2006 at 3:50 pm

Heh, use the new file geodatabase James. Personal geodatabases are so old skool
2 Steven Citron-Pousty // Nov 21, 2006 at 4:19 pm

Yeah except you have no way into a file geodatabase except for ArcObjects based platforms. Old skool is better than locked up. I do remember someone saying that they were going to release a public API or odbc or some sort of access to file geodb. I will let someone else hold their breath waiting for that release….
3 Christian // Nov 22, 2006 at 4:07 am

great idea! thanks!
4 mapperz // Nov 22, 2006 at 4:30 am

Still using shapefiles - you try adding a geodatabase to Maplex Standalone (3.5 Beta 2)
no go!

You need to upgrade to 9.2 Geodatabases to make use of the ‘all new’ Cartographic Representations.
5 James Fee // Nov 22, 2006 at 6:01 am

Believe me, if you work with the U.S. Federal Government, these are worth their weight in gold.
6 J Wallis // Nov 22, 2006 at 8:18 am

ESRI is hellbent on making the shapefile go the way of the dodo bird. File based GDB will hopefully be the death knell, but it needs to be a very doucmented file format so they can push adoption. After tasting aliases, domains and topology in PGDB, I abhore anything sent to me in shape. 12 char column names are so 1980s.
7 Doug // Nov 22, 2006 at 8:29 am

J Wallis I agree that file GDBs should help shapefiles go the way of the DODO, but I’d prefer for ESRI to not document their binary structure. Rather I think that ESRI should provide a C/.Net/Java API for accessing what is in a file GDB as well as an ODBC driver. Think about it: why do you want to dig through binary files when you can have an API to read and write with?
8 James Fee // Nov 22, 2006 at 8:52 am

File based GDB will hopefully be the death knell, but it needs to be a very doucmented file format so they can push adoption.

ESRI has already said they do not plan to offer such documentation but an API to connect to them.

This is why they will never replace Shapefiles. If ESRI was serious about the filegdb replacing the shapefile, they would open it up. It is a moot point anyway because even the Personal GDB has gotten little traction out of the ESRI suite so sharing PGDBs is almost impossible with the community at large vs Shapefiles which are supported by almost all. Plus 9.2 PGDBs and File GDBs are not backwards compatible with even 9.1 so millions of users are left out of the cold.

Don’t get me wrong, I hate the PGDB and am very happy to see the File GDB, but I’m thinking ESRI is missing a great opportunity here to set the standard.
9 Steven Citron-Pousty // Nov 22, 2006 at 10:57 am

Doug:
Given ESRI’s latest moves with the ADF and other pricing/lock in moves I would prefer they open the binary format and let some open source people write their own drivers. There is a C and Java API to SDE but look at some of the concerns developers have about using them. Give us the spec and let other people write the drivers. Well, if ESRI wants to give the drivers and doc the spec so people can roll their own drivers as well I am cool with that.

I am in total agreement with James except I don’t think ESRI will step up to set the standard.
10 Paul Ramsey // Nov 25, 2006 at 10:51 am

If they release their API as open source, with a BSD license, they can get good adoption of file GDB. If they release a closed API, I can see adoption being slow… what vendor wants an ESRI binary blob linked into their software?
11 James Fee // Nov 25, 2006 at 10:54 am

If they release their API as open source, with a BSD license, they can get good adoption of file GDB. If they release a closed API, I can see adoption being slow… what vendor wants an ESRI binary blob linked into their software?

Paul, I asked that very question at the User Conference, but they insisted that everyone wants the ESRI API.

Not sure if they noticed my eyes roll or not.
12 Bill // Nov 25, 2006 at 11:51 am

I’ve had this discussion with a few folks at ESRI over the years. Their API as a whole is extremely powerful but hardly anyone needs it in its totality. The business case is whether it would cost you less to build and maintain the subset you need for your application when compared to licensing/maintenance costs. The more expensive they make the ADF, the more it will lose this comparison, especially in the face of open source products that are gaining in sophistication, stability and support.

In short, everyone may want it but there’s probably a top end that they’re will to pay for it.
13 majid // Nov 26, 2006 at 1:48 am

thank you so much
14 majid // Nov 27, 2006 at 2:10 am

dear james:

i am majid mousavi ,student of watershed
management in iran.your documents about
arcgis was very interesting for me.

sincerely yours.
15 majid // Nov 30, 2006 at 8:10 am

dear james:

I will be greatly oblige to you if
you write about use of arcgis for remote sensing interpretation(satelite image interpretation).

sincerely yours
16 John Malpas // Mar 16, 2007 at 9:18 pm

I have downloaded some National Hydrology Dataset personal geodatabase files (.mdb), and would like to be able to read the binary data.
Has anybody done this? I have a great java library
from BBN that reads shapefiles. It is hard to imagine adapting this library to read GDB binary data, because it reads a .shx file at the same time it reads the .shp file.

Thank you
17 Tim Varner // Apr 6, 2007 at 9:15 pm

ESRI has recently stated that no open API will be offered for the FGDB. Instead they plan to publish the FGDB spec sometime after ArcGIS9.3 is released.

Guess that will give ESRI’s business partners time to develop code to work with the FGDB without competition from the Open Source crowd.
18 moore // Apr 7, 2007 at 1:34 pm

I have downloaded some National Hydrology Dataset personal geodatabase files (.mdb), and would like to be able to read the binary data.
Has anybody done this?

Manifold will do this. It can also update the geometry in the .mdb

The reality is, ESRI regrets ever making the shapefile open. It allowed for other users to bring .shp data into their software too easily. ESRI longs for the day when the coverage model way proprietary, and if anyone even though of reading it, they’d hit you with a lawsuit.

Trust me, geography doesn’t connect all of us. Only those with the money to pay Jack.
19 John Malpas // Apr 7, 2007 at 9:26 pm

I have actually got the BBN OpenMap java library to read the binary (shapefile) data in
NHD personal geodatabases.